Is your Pastor a TT Durai?
-
Does anyone know how how much your pastor is being paid annually?
Does he have a free car, free house, free housing loan etc.
Do you think some pastors in Singapore could be acting like another TT Durai? -
no.
TT durei does not commands faith, which defies logic.
-
A pastor is answerable to his parish.
My church conducts AGM where the audited accounts are reviewed by members of the church. It's the same with other Anglican parishes.
No free nothing.
Not sure about other denominations though. -
any idea how much is he being paid? And how much do you think is too much?
-
As mentioned, a pastor (in the case of Anglicans, vicar) is accountable to his parish.
No offense but I think issues such as pay or how he is remunerated is between them and within the diocese. -
i think there should be reviews by an external panel on wages and expenditures by religious organisations, on top of what you mentioned, and a detailed report on those made available to everyone.Originally posted by sillyme:As mentioned, a pastor (in the case of Anglicans, vicar) is accountable to his parish.
No offense but I think issues such as pay or how he is remunerated is between them and within the diocese.
but im juz dreaming. -
I'll speak for the Methodist church...
The Methodist Church in Singapore has a stringent structure of employment, with various levels of promotion. Obviously the higher one is promoted, the higher is the salary. Not too long ago, the executive council right at the top make a mistake on the Bishop's pay. They did not cover it up but put the issue on the table and explain what had gone wrong.
Each church has it's own exco and oversees everything from the running of the church to the employment of it's workers. Granted that not every church is professionally run, and there will be some that require a higher level of management than others.
I don't see anything wrong with a pastor making a reasonable amount of salary. Unfortunately there are always some who feel that a pastor should be paid next to nothing and has to live in extreme frugality.
Each pastor also has to support his family and his extended family, and the salary structure may be pegged to some secular parallel.
Having said all that, I am not aware of any Methodist pastor that is seen to be extremely well paid and drive around in high end BMWs or Mercedes.
Again, as with some of the other threads.... I ask: what is the purpose of this thread?
I don't believe sillyme and myself speak for all congregations, but I'd assume to be true that most churches observe a practical level of frugality. There are, of course, some churches (a minority I'd say) that may be able to afford their leaders a lifestype of luxury. At the end of the day, they are accountable to God like everybody else, and what God would do to these churches and their leaders is between God and them. -
Not only are you dreaming, you're being illogical. A church or any religous organisation is not answerable to the general public. Just like how the board of a company is answerable to shareholders in a company and not people who have no stake in the company.Originally posted by Ito_^:i think there should be reviews by an external panel on wages and expenditures by religious organisations, on top of what you mentioned, and a detailed report on those made available to everyone.
but im juz dreaming.
I'm sure you don't expect the wages of the CEO of HP to be reviewed by a external panel of some sort right?
Hopefully you are not trying to make an issue out of this just because it is a church. -
I think so far Chin Eng's reply has been pretty sufficient, anybody else new into this thread should read through that. And sillyme's post reiterates the fact that a pastor is answerable to his own church and not to the general public, unlike the case of NKF.
Like Chin Eng, I question the purpose and intent of this thread. -
No, I think it shld be decided by all church members, not just the higher levels.Originally posted by sillyme:As mentioned, a pastor (in the case of Anglicans, vicar) is accountable to his parish.
No offense but I think issues such as pay or how he is remunerated is between them and within the diocese. -
You mean what? Voting?Originally posted by shade343:No, I think it shld be decided by all church members, not just the higher levels. -
for smaller churches, yes, its easy enoughOriginally posted by shade343:No, I think it shld be decided by all church members, not just the higher levels.
for some or most churches I know, its decided by a council (elected by church members), but of course, the members can question their decision during AGM
especially so for some churches, where there are a few pastors (seinor pastor, mission pastor, chinese church pastor, children church pastor, youth pastor ....etc) plus the church administrative staffs ....etc, if every one of them have to have their salary decided by church members
imagine the logistical efforts involved? the time involved? the administrative works involved? ...etc
I know of some churches in US that is running on this method, but note that they only have 1 pastor that also happen to be the only staff in the church. -
Just like what you do during your estate management meeting. You have the right to ask and veto if you think it is wrong.Originally posted by Icemoon:You mean what? Voting? -
Originally posted by Chin Eng:
You mean you have never ask yourself these sort of questions before?
[b]Again, as with some of the other threads.... I ask: what is the purpose of this thread? -
I think unker Eng's question is... what is your purpose/objective in asking these questions here?Originally posted by Gazelle:You mean you have never ask yourself these sort of questions before?
-
Gents, disregardling the tone of the thread starter, I think it's a very legitimate concern.
while it's obvious that certain denominations have much more stringent checks and balances in place than others, for some it's still a pretty much grey area. And every now and then we heard of financial scandals hitting churches in the US or Africa too. (where unorthodox denominations spring up frequently I suppose). And we do have to keep in mind that our dear friend Durai and the NKF managed to live it up for years despite yearly regulatory audits, eh ?
it's not just a concern for Christianity of course, but I think a legitimate concern for all religious organizations, a hands free approach is NOT good enough, for the members of the parishes and diocese are too, members of the public, no ? I think it's not quite right to say that it's solely a matter between the organizations and their followers, it's like saying that the world doesn't have a right, and shouldn't care about cases like waco or the jonestown suicides, or that priests molesting little boys are none of the public's business too, right ? -
so, wad is the TS trying to refer to?
-
Originally posted by Gazelle:Just like what you do during your estate management meeting. You have the right to ask and veto if you think it is wrong.
Precisely, because I have been in this so-called "management" meeting in the church that lots of questions were asked.Originally posted by Gazelle:You mean you have never ask yourself these sort of questions before?
But what is not answered here is: why are you asking?
If it is for info, then I say that the answer is already given: many churches belong to a larger body and has good checks and balances in place, smaller independent churches have their own exco, usually with people with relevant expertise. Larger independent churches who do not answer to any higher body will still need to answer to God.
Yes, there have been black sheep, but that is far and few in between.
.... you think churches are run by brain washed individuals? then I think you are totally wrong. -
A pastor is answerable to his parish.
Well TT durai is answerable to the board of directors.
My church conducts AGM where the audited accounts are reviewed by members of the church. It's the same with other Anglican parishes.
No free nothing.
Not sure about other denominations though.
NKF have regular audit check from other company where the result is reviewed and shown to members of publc, including MOH
Yet it is still successful in controlling the funds such tat he earn a lot from it.
In fact he is not alone. The youth challenge and some blind association president also faces the same suspicious mismanagement
In tis uncertain world, it is best to be more of a skeptic and conduct more transparent checks etc such as amount of money used on pay for the pastor or any other allowances tat is hidden or contract of building churches go into selected companies where they can get an advantage etc
Just a suggestion... wat if the funding have to be audited by Ministry of information (can be other relevant department) to ensure there r no discrepancies. It may not have to be government link or maybe just some standard like ISO etc. U can say it is not public money but tis is suppose to help the believers themselves. I don't think it is a case where u just donate the money for charity, but it goes into someone pockets, and u act ignorance to it, and expect god to treat it as though u have given to charity instead of treating it as money to fund thieves. Doesn't jesus ask believers to be wary of thieves and robbers in the temple ? -
The Singapore government is quite hands-off with religion. In a multi-racial, multi-religion society, I don't think they will step in until there is a security thread.
True that TT Durai was answerable to his board. In his case, some of the directors were in cahoots with him. It was their responsibility to keep things in check and they failed.
If you want to keep the affairs of the church in check, then come join us
-
Maybe you can help shed some light about what actually happens during the management meeting.Originally posted by Chin Eng:Precisely, because I have been in this so-called "management" meeting in the church that lots of questions were asked.
But what is not answered here is: why are you asking?
If it is for info, then I say that the answer is already given: many churches belong to a larger body and has good checks and balances in place, smaller independent churches have their own exco, usually with people with relevant expertise. Larger independent churches who do not answer to any higher body will still need to answer to God.
Yes, there have been black sheep, but that is far and few in between.
.... you think churches are run by brain washed individuals? then I think you are totally wrong.
1) Who is allowed to attend the management meeting?
2) What information are shared during the meeting? -
1) Who is allowed to attend the management meeting?
Each church may have more than one congregation. At church level, there may be administrative departments like building management, finance and human resource. Other departments may include Christian education, missionary and outreach. At congregational level, such departments are further broken down either at functional level like Sunday School, Ushers, Welcome committee, etc.
Members who are deemed suitable to serve in such committees are either elected or appointed. The criteria of selection depends on a broad spectrum series of factors which may include professional qualification ie, architects and engineers who may run the building management dept, professional accountants and auditors who may run the finance departments and human resource heads to run the human resource depts and etc. The one point that needed noting is that this are all done at a volunteer basis, ie no salary or financial gains is involved.
At the higher level, obviously not everyone can attend the meetings. This is no different from any organisation. Any committee can have the right to co-opt an ordinary member into any meeting if the need requires. And believe it or not, most committees will welcome ordinary members into such meetings if such ordinary members have been in the church long enough and show interest in knowing more.
You obviously don't know that in any given church, looking for people to serve in such committees are NEVER easy.
2) What information are shared during the meeting?
Depending at which level of these meetings, many issues can be discussed, including the remuneration of church staff. Confidentiality issue is no different from any secular organisation as sensitive issues may be discussed and debated (sometimes in rather heated environment) upon.
I believe I have been nice enough to share with you such information. Yet, you have not even bothered to answer the questions on why you wish to discuss this.
Again I ask, do you think that all churches are run by brain-washed individuals who'd careless support their leaders extravagant lifestyle?
And again I ask, what is your intent?
Based solely on your opening thread, I think the answer has already been given:
1. Yes, it is possible that there are some pastors who live like TT Durai.
2. Most churches operate with strong sense of frugality and accountability.
3. Money contributed by members to any given church essentially a private matter. If such members wish to support POINT 1, then it's their own business. However, base on what I know, the POINT 2 scenario is probably what most churches are operating on.
So, now that you have my explanation, what do you plan to do about it? -
Originally posted by Chin Eng:
(1) The reason why we have TT Durai in NKF is mainly because people believe that point (2) exist.
And again I ask, what is your intent?
Based solely on your opening thread, I think the answer has already been given:
1. Yes, it is possible that there are some pastors who live like TT Durai.
2. Most churches operate with strong sense of frugality and accountability.
3. Money contributed by members to any given church essentially a private matter. If such members wish to support POINT 1, then it's their own business. However, base on what I know, the POINT 2 scenario is probably what most churches are operating on.
So, now that you have my explanation, what do you plan to do about it?[/b]
(2) Just like any charity organisation, we donate based on our personal will to help the needy not to fund the organisation board of directors.
My question is, who is to decide how much is too much and how much is being reasonable? "reasonable" or "too much" I believe is relative and depend who you speaks to. If the board of directors are multi-millionaire or their tai-tais, I am sure a $15K salary will be considered as "token" or "peanuts". Supposed if the church committee are make up of people from middle income group, a $15K salary will be consider as "generous".
So back to my question, who is there to decide? are the followers aware of how their contribution is being spent? -
May I ask the same question to Gazelle in return?
What do you think is reasonable pay for pastors? -
You can always leave the church if you are not happy with the management there.Originally posted by Gazelle:So back to my question, who is there to decide? are the followers aware of how their contribution is being spent?
Likewise, you can always reduce your tithe or offering if you think they are spent unwisely. If they force the 10% rule on you, leave the church?
The problem comes when kids, who are too young to decide, join the church and get influenced by peer pressure.